Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 353

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Prospective Study of Psychological Predictors of Lumbar Surgery Outcome

Trief, Paula M., Grant, William, Fredrickson, Bruce·2000·Spine

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective design in which 102 patients were evaluated with a battery of psychological assessment tests 1-2 weeks before surgery, and outcome was assessed 6 months and 1 year after surgery. OBJECTIVES: The study examined whether three aspects of psychological distress (depression, anxiety, and hostility) predict several surgical outcomes (employment status, subjective pain change ratings, and changes in functional abilities). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Surgery for back pain has been shown to yield poor results in 15-45% of patients. Tools are needed to identify those "at risk" for poor outcome. Aspects of emotional distress, including anxiety, depression, and hostility, have been found to be relevant to various illness outcomes (e.g., cancer, heart disease), but their influence has not been prospectively evaluated for back pain surgical outcome. METHODS: Study patients completed measures of distress before surgery, including the Spielberger Trait Anxiety Inventory, Zung Depression Scale, Modified Somatic Perception Questionnaire, and Cook-Medley Hostility Scale. At 1-year follow-up, patients completed pain change ratings, functional abilities measure (Dallas Pain Questionnaire), and questions about employment status. RESULTS: Multivariate regression analyses, controlling for significant demographic variables, found that failure to return to work was predicted by presurgical anxiety (P < 0.001) and depression (P < 0. 01); failure to report improvement in pain was predicted by presurgical somatic anxiety (P < 0.01) and depression (P < 0.058); and failure to report improved functional abilities was predicted by presurgical somatic anxiety (P < 0.01) and depression (P < 0.05). Hostility did not predict any outcome. Regression analyses found a strong predictor to be a combination of the Zung Depression Scale and Modified Somatic Perception Questionnaire, known as the Distress and Risk Assessment Method (DRAM). CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that screening for presurgical distress is likely to identify those patients at risk for poor outcome. Studies to evaluate whether presurgical psychological treatment improves outcome are warranted.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00007632-200010150-00012

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 32 references

Cited by

See all 353

Metadata

Authors
Trief, P. M., Grant, W., & Fredrickson, B.
Venue
Spine
Published
2000-10
Volume
25
Issue
20
Pages
2616-2621
ISSN
0362-2436 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2045787022
Cited by
353
References
32
FWCI
2.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Prospective Study of Psychological Predictors of Lumbar Surgery Outcome. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00007632-200010150-00012
The paper
Trief, P. M., Grant, W., & Fredrickson, B. (2000). A Prospective Study of Psychological Predictors of Lumbar Surgery Outcome. Spine. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200010150-00012

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.